America needs more mathematicians, scientists and engineers, and the Obama administration is turning to videogames to help create them.

As part of an initiative to reinvigorate math, technology and science education in American schools, President Obama has announced the National STEM Video Game Challenge, which offers prizes and expertise to the developers that submit the best educational games.

The challenge is sponsored by the ESA, Microsoft and AMD, and teams will compete for a $100,000 dollars worth of funding, split into three different awards. The first award is the grand prize of $50,000 for the best overall submission, with $25,000 set aside for a collegiate prize, and the final $25,000 going to the game that "greatest potential to reach underserved populations." As well as the cash prize, entrants will also get help and advice in how to take their designs further, as well as help promoting and distributing it.

Speaking at a White House event, President Obama said that the success of America as a nation depended on being a nation of discovery and innovation. He applauded the organizers and sponsors of the challenge for lending their expertise and resources to improving science, technology, engineering and math education in the United States.

The opening date for submissions is October 12th, and the closing date is January 5th, with the finalists announced in mid-February and the final rounds taking place in mid-March. Entrants must be U.S. citizens and aged 18 or over, and teams applying for the collegiate must be currently enrolled in either an undergraduate or graduate degree program. You can find more information about the challenge on the official website.

ma55ter_fett:50,000 grand prize huh, so I'm guessing this is aimed at indie developers and one man operations.

100,000 total is nothing, really this is barely news worthy since almost nothing good will come of it.

Got a pretty negative brain on you there, besides:

The Developer Prize challenges emerging and experienced game developers to design mobile games, includinFg games for the mobile Web, for young children (grades pre-K through 4) that teach key STEM concepts and foster an interest in STEM subject areas.

The Youth Prize engages middle school students (grades 5 through 8) in STEM learning by challenging them to design original video games. The Youth Prize design challenge will be open to middle school students from any U.S. school with a special emphasis on reaching students in underserved urban and rural communities.

It's looking at both emerging and young designers, and while yes it also mentions experienced designers, I get the feeling they aren't talking about Valve or Ubisoft. ;P Although, there wouldn't be anything stopping the big names from participating, even if just for the PR.

I think it's a wonderful idea personally, and hope many devs decided to take up the challenge.

In other news, Obama today announced that video games are pure evil and should be banned as soon as possible.

Srsly: I dont understand the thinking behind this whole "educational video games" thing. Children and young adults play video games because they are fun, and Algebra: Quest For Numbers just aint fun. I cant see the difference between sitting children down and giving them the same stuff on paper.

I mean, is my generation really that dumb? Will the most hardened rebels allow themselves to be fooled by such a cheap trick? (Ok... nvm)

Calling it an 'Educational Game' is a huge mistake IMHO... when has such a game ever been considered fun? Nobody wants to play a game where they have to stop to work out Maths problems or only progress if they can name a particular historic figure.

"America needs more mathematicians, scientists and engineers..." - You want more math, science and engineering graduates? Then make a game to inspire them to learn and not to try and teach them whilst they play!

I'm sure movies/TV series have influenced waaay more people in their career choices than any 'Educational Video' so why shouldn't a purely recreational game inspire someone into a particular career?

.. having said all of that I look forward to seeing what come out of it! :-)

I rather like this. If it goes well, this could very well be a stepping off point for more serious initiatives. A $50/25/25,000 prize for an educational game, to me, smells like someone testing the waters for some kind of (probably much smaller-scale) DARPA-esque software initiative.

Dogstreet:Calling it an 'Educational Game' is a huge mistake IMHO... when has such a game ever been considered fun? Nobody wants to play a game where they have to stop to work out Maths problems or only progress if they can name a particular historic figure.

"America needs more mathematicians, scientists and engineers..." - You want more math, science and engineering graduates? Then make a game to inspire them to learn not to teach them whilst they play!

I'm sure movies/TV series have influenced waaay more people in their career choices than any 'Educational Video' so why shouldn't a purely recreational game inspire someone into a particular career?

.. having said all of that I look forward to seeing what come out of it! :-)

Oregon Trail.

Secondly...everyone seems to be getting bogged down in semantics, yes, that's the name of the competition, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a game designed to teach Math has to be a series of Math puzzles interspersed with other gameplay. I would hope that the Designers would get creative, with the puzzles integrated fully into the game and not simply a blatant 'please answer what 20 x 5 is to continue'.

Dogstreet:Calling it an 'Educational Game' is a huge mistake IMHO... when has such a game ever been considered fun? Nobody wants to play a game where they have to stop to work out Maths problems or only progress if they can name a particular historic figure.

"America needs more mathematicians, scientists and engineers..." - You want more math, science and engineering graduates? Then make a game to inspire them to learn not to teach them whilst they play!

I'm sure movies/TV series have influenced waaay more people in their career choices than any 'Educational Video' so why shouldn't a purely recreational game inspire someone into a particular career?

.. having said all of that I look forward to seeing what come out of it! :-)

Oregon Trail.

Secondly...everyone seems to be getting bogged down in semantics, yes, that's the name of the competition, but that doesn't necessarily mean that a game designed to teach Math has to be a series of Math puzzles interspersed with other gameplay. I would hope that the Designers would get creative, with the puzzles integrated fully into the game and not simply a blatant 'please answer what 20 x 5 is to continue'.

The reason we have fewer people interested in math and science careers isn't because math and science need to be "more fun." It's because people need to be less dependent on "fun" to motivate them to DO things.

Our students have a ridiculously low tolerance for discomfort. Something doesn't even have to be boring, it just has to be "NOT a game," and kid shut down. But what's worse is that we let them, by making excuses.

Do I WANT to pay my light bill? No. Is it FUN? No. But I do it, and I do it on time, because I like having electricity at my house, and that's what I NEED to do to keep it. Trace it back into my childhood, and you can find the source of that simple (but strangely absent) work ethic: I didn't WANT to take out the trash, and it wasn't FUN, but I liked getting paid an allowance and being able to do things, and the chores were what I had to do to earn them.

You want kids to learn math and science? Make them learn it. And if they don't, hold them at that grade level until they do. You're not learning math or science because they're FUN. You're learning them because the thought processes they develop are critical to being more than just a mindless drone for the rest of your life.

dastardly:The reason we have fewer people interested in math and science careers isn't because math and science need to be "more fun." It's because people need to be less dependent on "fun" to motivate them to DO things.

Our students have a ridiculously low tolerance for discomfort. Something doesn't even have to be boring, it just has to be "NOT a game," and kid shut down. But what's worse is that we let them, by making excuses.

Do I WANT to pay my light bill? No. Is it FUN? No. But I do it, and I do it on time, because I like having electricity at my house, and that's what I NEED to do to keep it. Trace it back into my childhood, and you can find the source of that simple (but strangely absent) work ethic: I didn't WANT to take out the trash, and it wasn't FUN, but I liked getting paid an allowance and being able to do things, and the chores were what I had to do to earn them.

You want kids to learn math and science? Make them learn it. And if they don't, hold them at that grade level until they do. You're not learning math or science because they're FUN. You're learning them because the thought processes they develop are critical to being more than just a mindless drone for the rest of your life.

And not everyone can be a god-damned pro-Athlete or singer.

so your saying kids cant choose if they want to learn something now we need to force that on them? that's the easy way of making kids hate science and math all together. people wont do something simply because its needed, paying your bills isnt fun but you do it to get something in return ie electricity or water but if they learn science but never use it in life nothing good came out of it. motivating people is the key to making them work for it, better games are a way to do so, and the low discomfort comes with the higher technology and not simply because we allow it to be. 40 years ago people tolerated these things because that was the only option available. not because parents and school were strict.

so your saying kids cant choose if they want to learn something now we need to force that on them? that's the easy way of making kids hate science and math all together. people wont do something simply because its needed, paying your bills isnt fun but you do it to get something in return ie electricity or water but if they learn science but never use it in life nothing good came out of it. motivating people is the key to making them work for it, better games are a way to do so, and the low discomfort comes with the higher technology and not simply because we allow it to be. 40 years ago people tolerated these things because that was the only option available. not because parents and school were strict.

Yes, I'm saying kids don't get the choice. Because they're KIDS. They haven't been out into the real world, and they can't make an informed decision on what they will or will not need out there.

You make the mistake of saying that simply because I don't agree with the "make learning fun" overdose that I'm saying motivation isn't an issue. I'm saying that we need to be sure about WHAT behaviors we're motivating, and how that motivation impacts FUTURE expectations.

Most of the time, learning is NOT fun. What you can DO with that learning might be. For instance, learning to play an instrument requires hours of practice and hard work--these are, for the majority of folks, not fun. But being able to PLAY the instrument is fun. The work and learning are the cost of the fun, and they come first.

When we take that part out of the process, making it fun, we ruin learning. Sure, we get a short-term burst of interest because of the novelty of the game... but then when they get to a level at which there IS no game? Or when they get to work and find out that there is no game, and that it's most often NOT fun? It's better to use TRUE motivation and TRUE teaching than this instant-results method that only lasts until the next test.

Our methods are what need refinement. I agree that most of the science/math curriculum presents information that 99% of people don't use beyond high school. The quadratic formula is useless to most people in the world, yet we believe every 8th grader should know it. That IS a problem, I agree. Our curriculum is currently a mile wide and an inch deep, and as a result teachers can't teach it the way they know they should.

Learning math and science isn't just about learning the content in the book. It's about learning how to THINK mathematically and how to THINK scientifically. Kids do not want to do these things in and of themselves, but they will need these skills to succeed in life. The answer isn't "make them fun." It's "make them USEFUL."

If you want someone to have a skill, you can take two approaches:

1) Bait them with treats. You'll get a superficial interest, bare minimum effort, and a gradual erosion of self-motivation... but that only comes later on, so you don't have to take the blame for it.

2) Put them in situations that DEMAND they have those skills. And then show them how to get them. Learning this way is UNCOMFORTABLE, because it forces us to stand face-to-face with things we don't know and can't do yet. But then it teaches us to SOLVE that problem.

The most important thing kids need to be learning is how to do a good job at whatever they're doing, WHETHER THEY FEEL LIKE IT OR NOT. Once a person learns that, life gets so much easier AND they get to have more fun as a result, because they'll be able to meet all the needs that could get in the way of that.